Robert Radano's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/270558/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/172609-who-is-the-mystery-buyer?source=feed#comment-754681 754681 Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:59:14 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/35600?source=feed#comment-740604 740604 Mon, 02 Nov 2009 12:35:07 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/35395?source=feed#comment-735915 735915 Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:45:41 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/35010?source=feed#comment-731000 731000
The other factor that may be weighing on financial markets is the recent announcement that Sen. Reid is now going to press the Senate for a vote on the public option for health insurance. There have been rumors and releases that maintain the White House favors the trigger approach. Reid's announcement may indicate another Senator has been turned. I wonder what the public option would mean for Treasury yields and the value of the Dollar. Are global investors really willing to finance a federal insurance program for health care? ]]> Mon, 26 Oct 2009 13:56:39 -0400
The other factor that may be weighing on financial markets is the recent announcement that Sen. Reid is now going to press the Senate for a vote on the public option for health insurance. There have been rumors and releases that maintain the White House favors the trigger approach. Reid's announcement may indicate another Senator has been turned. I wonder what the public option would mean for Treasury yields and the value of the Dollar. Are global investors really willing to finance a federal insurance program for health care? ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/167213-barron-s-miller-time-completely-misses-the-math-and-the-mark?source=feed#comment-722466 722466
As a former Legg Mason broker, I can report Miller always had a "relative" value approach to investing. Readers should know that he was the under-study to the eclectic manager who built the LMVTX, Ernie Kiehne. Ernie was director of research and responsible for the success of the Value Trust going back to the early 1980's when it was Legg Mason's only mutual fund.

Back then Ernie used to get on the Legg Mason institutional research call and talk about how his cats had told him about the value in PEG, or some other boring true value idea. In order to keep Bill happy he was given the more aggressive/relative value fund, The Legg Mason Special Investment Trust, and he did quite well with it.

When he took over for Ernie, Miller brought his relative value ideas to the flagship fund, but many value investors always chafed at Miller's analysis. Style drift in value asset management has always been an issue as often times value investing is out of favor, which can make retaining investors/assets very difficult. Unfortunately for Bill he gave in to the dark side of value investing and no one stopped him. In the process he hurt investors, the firm and his own reputation. It will take more than a puff piece in Barrons to change that. ]]> Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:22:55 -0400
As a former Legg Mason broker, I can report Miller always had a "relative" value approach to investing. Readers should know that he was the under-study to the eclectic manager who built the LMVTX, Ernie Kiehne. Ernie was director of research and responsible for the success of the Value Trust going back to the early 1980's when it was Legg Mason's only mutual fund.

Back then Ernie used to get on the Legg Mason institutional research call and talk about how his cats had told him about the value in PEG, or some other boring true value idea. In order to keep Bill happy he was given the more aggressive/relative value fund, The Legg Mason Special Investment Trust, and he did quite well with it.

When he took over for Ernie, Miller brought his relative value ideas to the flagship fund, but many value investors always chafed at Miller's analysis. Style drift in value asset management has always been an issue as often times value investing is out of favor, which can make retaining investors/assets very difficult. Unfortunately for Bill he gave in to the dark side of value investing and no one stopped him. In the process he hurt investors, the firm and his own reputation. It will take more than a puff piece in Barrons to change that. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/165918-jim-rogers-on-the-next-10-years?source=feed#comment-720660 720660
First, China is not a free society. No matter what anyone says this issue is China's most fundamental problem. Free enterprise exists up to the point where central planners within China's government have a different view.

Second, do not underestimate the creative destruction of the American economy. More than most economies, the US can move in different directions faster than other large economic systems.

Third, consider predictions from a few years ago today. Most don't hold value. There are many world views and going against the common view...which is China is the emerging super-power in the world...may well look different in a few short years.

Fourth, Rogers predictions regarding commodities may well be accurate, and his investment views in a macro sense have proved out more times than not, but his political views are not as accurate. ]]> Mon, 19 Oct 2009 12:33:42 -0400
First, China is not a free society. No matter what anyone says this issue is China's most fundamental problem. Free enterprise exists up to the point where central planners within China's government have a different view.

Second, do not underestimate the creative destruction of the American economy. More than most economies, the US can move in different directions faster than other large economic systems.

Third, consider predictions from a few years ago today. Most don't hold value. There are many world views and going against the common view...which is China is the emerging super-power in the world...may well look different in a few short years.

Fourth, Rogers predictions regarding commodities may well be accurate, and his investment views in a macro sense have proved out more times than not, but his political views are not as accurate. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/33617?source=feed#comment-705812 705812 Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:07:44 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/138635-someone-is-finally-listening-to-sirius-xm-shareholders?source=feed#comment-513101 513101 Thu, 21 May 2009 13:00:06 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/133364-what-s-normal-for-the-economy?source=feed#comment-479515 479515
As for the article, don't know how we "de-globalize." America was created in the 1700's in a bold move towards globalization. Unless China decides to build another wall, globalization will continue. It will be different but let's give creative destruction a chance to work before we conclude that the "morphing" of the problem is completely negative. Governments can't buy every element of this dynamic economy. We're nearing the point where Congress and institutional bond buyers are going to realize something else must be done. Not all morphing is bad. ]]> Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:57:13 -0400
As for the article, don't know how we "de-globalize." America was created in the 1700's in a bold move towards globalization. Unless China decides to build another wall, globalization will continue. It will be different but let's give creative destruction a chance to work before we conclude that the "morphing" of the problem is completely negative. Governments can't buy every element of this dynamic economy. We're nearing the point where Congress and institutional bond buyers are going to realize something else must be done. Not all morphing is bad. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/22053?source=feed#comment-469740 469740 Mon, 20 Apr 2009 11:35:46 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/128495-geithner-s-plan-for-bad-assets-part-of-a-master-program?source=feed#comment-446506 446506 rr


On Mar 30 12:29 PM Mad Hedge Fund Trader wrote:

> Geithner should consider this. There is an easier, cheaper, and faster
> way to solve the banking crisis which no one is talking about on
> Capitol Hill. If collateralized debt obligations (CDO’s) are the
> problem, just get rid of them! Desecuritize them! Just convert them
> back into the underlying loans. There are $1.4 trillion in CDO’s
> outstanding backed by Alt-A and subprime loans in the form of 3,700
> individual securitizations of perhaps 3.7 million loans. Over 68%
> of the loans backing these bonds are current. Mark to market rules
> are forcing the banks to carry this paper on their balance sheets
> at 50%-80% discounts. The problem is that mark to market is a meaningless
> accounting fiction when there is no market. If you break up these
> securities and place the underlying loans back on the banks’ balance
> sheets, the good mortgages can be valued at 100% of face, and those
> behind in their payments or in default can be discounted to maybe
> 70% because they are still secured by the value of the homes. This
> would boost the value of the entire asset class from the current
> 20-50 cents up to 90 cents on the dollar. Restored balance sheets
> would enable banks to resume lending. Of course it would be a massive
> admin job unwinding the rats’ nests behind some of these securities,
> but Heaven knows there is abundant subprime and Alt-A expertise available
> for hire these days. Just sift through the ashes of Lehman Brothers
> and Bear Stearns. It is a workable plan, and therefore is unlikely
> to ever see the light of day.]]> Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:27:35 -0400 rr


On Mar 30 12:29 PM Mad Hedge Fund Trader wrote:

> Geithner should consider this. There is an easier, cheaper, and faster
> way to solve the banking crisis which no one is talking about on
> Capitol Hill. If collateralized debt obligations (CDO’s) are the
> problem, just get rid of them! Desecuritize them! Just convert them
> back into the underlying loans. There are $1.4 trillion in CDO’s
> outstanding backed by Alt-A and subprime loans in the form of 3,700
> individual securitizations of perhaps 3.7 million loans. Over 68%
> of the loans backing these bonds are current. Mark to market rules
> are forcing the banks to carry this paper on their balance sheets
> at 50%-80% discounts. The problem is that mark to market is a meaningless
> accounting fiction when there is no market. If you break up these
> securities and place the underlying loans back on the banks’ balance
> sheets, the good mortgages can be valued at 100% of face, and those
> behind in their payments or in default can be discounted to maybe
> 70% because they are still secured by the value of the homes. This
> would boost the value of the entire asset class from the current
> 20-50 cents up to 90 cents on the dollar. Restored balance sheets
> would enable banks to resume lending. Of course it would be a massive
> admin job unwinding the rats’ nests behind some of these securities,
> but Heaven knows there is abundant subprime and Alt-A expertise available
> for hire these days. Just sift through the ashes of Lehman Brothers
> and Bear Stearns. It is a workable plan, and therefore is unlikely
> to ever see the light of day.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/20470?source=feed#comment-438242 438242 Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:56:25 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/20409?source=feed#comment-436993 436993 Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:26:54 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/123283-tomorrowland-has-web-innovation-peaked?source=feed#comment-408410 408410
This is just the beginning. The current internet doesn't match what many technologists have already created. Even established technology companies are concerned. Look no further than Microsoft in terms of multi-billion dollar companies who may be defining a soon to be outdated business model. Older mature technology franchises will fight to defend their turf. These include telecomm companies, cable companies, some media companies. Others are already thinking "cloud computing" and other trends that will make the current technology baseline seem like "dial-up." The only question is whether our clumsy federal government will actually stimulate this sector of American entrepreneurism in time so that creative risk-takers can help this nation emerge from aging and ineffective business and government models. Moore’s (Gordon,) still exists. And other similar axioms regarding the pace of technological growth behind the scenes are still holding.

Never bet against American innovation.
]]> Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:35:39 -0500
This is just the beginning. The current internet doesn't match what many technologists have already created. Even established technology companies are concerned. Look no further than Microsoft in terms of multi-billion dollar companies who may be defining a soon to be outdated business model. Older mature technology franchises will fight to defend their turf. These include telecomm companies, cable companies, some media companies. Others are already thinking "cloud computing" and other trends that will make the current technology baseline seem like "dial-up." The only question is whether our clumsy federal government will actually stimulate this sector of American entrepreneurism in time so that creative risk-takers can help this nation emerge from aging and ineffective business and government models. Moore’s (Gordon,) still exists. And other similar axioms regarding the pace of technological growth behind the scenes are still holding.

Never bet against American innovation.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/121706-rick-santelli-the-best-five-minutes-in-cnbc-history?source=feed#comment-396497 396497
Since the markets and the country have been dealing with the credit crisis, (and now its impact on the real economy,) federal responses have shared one common theme. Regardless of the amount of money involved, the federal response has been treating symptoms, not causes. Therefore, anyone on the opposite side of the trade/argument has a compelling point. My view is that markets are reacting to a lack of leadership from either Wall Street or Washington. And rallies in the US currency, bonds and occasionally equities are a function not of a return of optimism or a positive policy response, but rather that the rest of the world's markets are worse off than America's. Hardly a vote of confidence.

Rather than complaining about the problem, (which is easy,) I'd like to see this site and the investment industry in general offer more solutions. Otherwise markets will get a strong dose of Democrat consensus policy rife with political compromise. The Stimulus bill is just the beginning and should be as scary to investors as a six handle on the SPX.
]]> Fri, 20 Feb 2009 10:30:16 -0500
Since the markets and the country have been dealing with the credit crisis, (and now its impact on the real economy,) federal responses have shared one common theme. Regardless of the amount of money involved, the federal response has been treating symptoms, not causes. Therefore, anyone on the opposite side of the trade/argument has a compelling point. My view is that markets are reacting to a lack of leadership from either Wall Street or Washington. And rallies in the US currency, bonds and occasionally equities are a function not of a return of optimism or a positive policy response, but rather that the rest of the world's markets are worse off than America's. Hardly a vote of confidence.

Rather than complaining about the problem, (which is easy,) I'd like to see this site and the investment industry in general offer more solutions. Otherwise markets will get a strong dose of Democrat consensus policy rife with political compromise. The Stimulus bill is just the beginning and should be as scary to investors as a six handle on the SPX.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/120728-is-barron-s-right-have-we-entered-a-golden-age-of-activist-investing?source=feed#comment-392311 392311
The other factor impacting any activist endeavor is a function of capital. Private equity funds and other activist investors will still require financing from not just shadow banks, but traditional banks. Right now, the additional capital required to complete a deal started by an activist may still be lacking. ]]> Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:25:21 -0500
The other factor impacting any activist endeavor is a function of capital. Private equity funds and other activist investors will still require financing from not just shadow banks, but traditional banks. Right now, the additional capital required to complete a deal started by an activist may still be lacking. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/119414-will-pimco-be-needing-a-bailout-soon?source=feed#comment-381503 381503 Mon, 09 Feb 2009 16:05:31 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/117978-buy-american-the-ghost-haunting-davos?source=feed#comment-373870 373870
With respect to the grumbling of participants at Davos, I agree with some of this post. My position has been that Paulson and Bernanke had to pursue a strategy of printing US Dollars, and Treasuries, to address the credit crisis. What alternative did they have? The question quickly became would the rest of the world support this gambit. Whether global economies have supported the US Dollar by choice or because they are being forced does not matter. What matters is that the continued support must be insured. This means a naive Congress must NOT advance "Buy American" protectionist policies. And the Fed, Treasury and White House must remain sensitive to global capital flows. If this works, (and its still a risky bet,) we will have monetized the US credit crisis and insured a market for a record amount of free-floating dollars and debt. The more foreign central banks and companies are forced to hold US currency, and associated debt and equity, the better off we will be. Its monetary and fiscal imperialism at its best or worst, depending on your point of view. ]]> Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:12:45 -0500
With respect to the grumbling of participants at Davos, I agree with some of this post. My position has been that Paulson and Bernanke had to pursue a strategy of printing US Dollars, and Treasuries, to address the credit crisis. What alternative did they have? The question quickly became would the rest of the world support this gambit. Whether global economies have supported the US Dollar by choice or because they are being forced does not matter. What matters is that the continued support must be insured. This means a naive Congress must NOT advance "Buy American" protectionist policies. And the Fed, Treasury and White House must remain sensitive to global capital flows. If this works, (and its still a risky bet,) we will have monetized the US credit crisis and insured a market for a record amount of free-floating dollars and debt. The more foreign central banks and companies are forced to hold US currency, and associated debt and equity, the better off we will be. Its monetary and fiscal imperialism at its best or worst, depending on your point of view. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/109205-a-remedy-for-short-selling-manipulation?source=feed#comment-320644 320644
All these uptick ideas are not the answer for two reasons. First, the known issue of ETF's and their role in short selling. Second, and perhaps more basic, the reason shorts can pin the bid so easily is because the most liquid stocks, (those with stock available to short,) trade with a penny bid. In a penny bid what's an uptick? Also, if I'm a marketmaker, old school or electronic, how much captial am I willing to risk on a penny bid?

Again, chime in and let me know, but if spreds were five cents would we not have more stabilization of price? Would it not be much simpler to define the bid and asked price? ]]> Thu, 04 Dec 2008 09:14:34 -0500
All these uptick ideas are not the answer for two reasons. First, the known issue of ETF's and their role in short selling. Second, and perhaps more basic, the reason shorts can pin the bid so easily is because the most liquid stocks, (those with stock available to short,) trade with a penny bid. In a penny bid what's an uptick? Also, if I'm a marketmaker, old school or electronic, how much captial am I willing to risk on a penny bid?

Again, chime in and let me know, but if spreds were five cents would we not have more stabilization of price? Would it not be much simpler to define the bid and asked price? ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/102993-the-pivot-point-will-likely-be-election-based?source=feed#comment-295025 295025 Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:01:32 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/97530-when-it-rains-it-pours?source=feed#comment-265886 265886
The financial markets are a mess...chaos, failures, depressed prices. Congress is reflective of America. Why do readers of this service think Congress sets these issues aside? Calls AGAINST this are 100-1. I know you all think they're idiots, but believe me, they can count phone calls. You should hear what voters are saying.

The electorate looks at Paulson and thinks Wall Street. They have little confidence in Bush, and frankly he hasn't given Americans a reason for this level of federal involvement. Americans also hear a "worbly" professiorial Bernanke. They don't understand these guys. They think...this is a bail-out for Wall Street. They do NOT see this as anything involving Main Street.

This article is naive. I stopped reading after the phrase...everybody thought this was a done deal. This was never a done deal...never. Any statements by Dodd and Frank were only one side of the story! When Senator Shelby takes himself out of the negotiations on the first day and the only Republican present on the House side is just an "obverser," which Barney Frank knew...there are no negotiations...there is no deal.

Bush let Paulson and Bernanke run this show. That is another in a long list of mistakes this President has made. McCain really did come back because he knew there was a vacuum here. And, while we're at it, Dodd and Frank didn't do Obama any favors...they've been leaking details of this plan constantly. They probably told Obama they had a deal.

What we've lost here is valuable time because of mis-calculations by the managers of this process...all of them.]]> Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:34:15 -0400
The financial markets are a mess...chaos, failures, depressed prices. Congress is reflective of America. Why do readers of this service think Congress sets these issues aside? Calls AGAINST this are 100-1. I know you all think they're idiots, but believe me, they can count phone calls. You should hear what voters are saying.

The electorate looks at Paulson and thinks Wall Street. They have little confidence in Bush, and frankly he hasn't given Americans a reason for this level of federal involvement. Americans also hear a "worbly" professiorial Bernanke. They don't understand these guys. They think...this is a bail-out for Wall Street. They do NOT see this as anything involving Main Street.

This article is naive. I stopped reading after the phrase...everybody thought this was a done deal. This was never a done deal...never. Any statements by Dodd and Frank were only one side of the story! When Senator Shelby takes himself out of the negotiations on the first day and the only Republican present on the House side is just an "obverser," which Barney Frank knew...there are no negotiations...there is no deal.

Bush let Paulson and Bernanke run this show. That is another in a long list of mistakes this President has made. McCain really did come back because he knew there was a vacuum here. And, while we're at it, Dodd and Frank didn't do Obama any favors...they've been leaking details of this plan constantly. They probably told Obama they had a deal.

What we've lost here is valuable time because of mis-calculations by the managers of this process...all of them.]]>